Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 14th May 2010 22:23 UTC
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu "UDS is over! And in the customary wrap-up I stood up and told the audience what the Foundations team have been discussing all week. One of the items is almost certainly going to get a little bit of publicity. We are going to be doing the work to have btrfs as an installation option, and we have not ruled out making it the default. I do stress the emphasis of that statement, a number of things would have to be true for us to take that decision."
Thread beginning with comment 424828
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Comment by bsharitt
by Laurence on Sun 16th May 2010 08:11 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by bsharitt"
Laurence
Member since:
2007-03-26


I read the other day a very nice comparison between Ext3, Ext4, XFS and Btrfs. Ext3 outperformed Ext4 by far. Btrfs surprised everybody by even outperforming Ext3 on most tests (though not all tests).

I'll try and find that review and post a link. But it's not the only review I have found with come to similar conclusions. Btrfs is quite usable already and the built-in compression made the filesystem perform even better (with todays fast hardware).


Please do, I'd be very interested to read that.

From my own *unscientific* usages, I've found Ext4 a very pleasant upgrade from Ext3 if just because of the significantly improved fsck times. But I've never really looked into it any more than that. So I'd be interested to know how much of an improvement / step backwards Ext4 really is.

Reply Parent Score: 2